Jordan Hill Discussion: Struggling in the new season

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby khmrP on Tue Nov 19, 2013 8:52 am

borri wrote:Look if CLE gave Earl Clark that deal.....you can guarantee than if Hill continues to do this, he'll become way too expensive for us to keep.


I'm pretty sure Clev is having big time buyers remorse with that Clark deal :man10: ....to be honest none of the past lakers who has looked good here and left has looked the same, Ariza has finally looked like he's living up to his contract but funny how he's doing it in the final year of his contract as well :man1:
User avatar
khmrP

 
Posts: 10461
Joined: Sat May 26, 2007 10:45 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby lukewaltonsdad on Tue Nov 19, 2013 9:25 am

I know most of this forum would disagree; but seeing as he is playing the best basketball of his career, and if he remains playing at this level; I would sell high and gauge the market for his trade value. If you can find a decent package for him that includes a quality PG, take it; the rule is you never trade a big for a small, but in this case, I'd make the exception depending on the PG...also, draft another big with a pick in this years draft.
lukewaltonsdad

 
Posts: 797
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2013 9:14 am

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby LakersN4 on Tue Nov 19, 2013 12:35 pm

lukewaltonsdad wrote:I know most of this forum would disagree; but seeing as he is playing the best basketball of his career, and if he remains playing at this level; I would sell high and gauge the market for his trade value. If you can find a decent package for him that includes a quality PG, take it; the rule is you never trade a big for a small, but in this case, I'd make the exception depending on the PG...also, draft another big with a pick in this years draft.

Agree completely.. We have to sell high on him before he gets injured again like we did with Bynum.. It might take him maintaining this level of play until the deadline for us to get a good starting PG for him but it's not out of the realm of possibility. I think if Hill keeps it up he'll get much higher offers than Earl Clark left for.. They're both tweeners but PF/C tweeners tend to get overpaid much more. Wish Hill had another season left on his contract so we could see if he could maintain his play while staying healthy over a lengthy period of time, but as things stand you have to shop him vs. overpaying for what might prove to be yet another injury prone big that will be limited continually over his career. We aren't bringing in 2 superstars this summer or even the next 2 summers if we have to commit 10+M a season to Hill unless Kobe retires. I'd love to keep Hill but not at the price he's likely to command.
Last edited by LakersN4 on Tue Nov 19, 2013 12:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
LakersN4

 
Posts: 2514
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 2:55 am

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby Doc Brown on Tue Nov 19, 2013 12:49 pm

What other injuries did he have before coming to the Lakers?
Rule of Thumb at ClubLakers - Never encourage people to check your post history.
User avatar
Doc Brown

 
Posts: 19446
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:11 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby borri on Tue Nov 19, 2013 12:53 pm

Doc Brown wrote:What other injuries did he have before coming to the Lakers?


I am curious too. I know he supposedly had a meniscus issue when he arrived....that's supposedly why Potato Head didn't play him for the first 20 or so games upon being traded from HOU to LAL for Fisher.

It's not like he's got a degenerative condition like Bynum.
User avatar
borri

 
Posts: 8035
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 5:16 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby The Rock on Tue Nov 19, 2013 1:19 pm

Tough. We know hes super good when he plays but the thing is hes not a great full time center (in a league going smaller and players moving up a position) and he does have some injury question marks

Either we keep him in a limited role to preserve him or play him big minutes and open him up to injuries

I think we might have an Earl Clark situation either way, hes gonna get a huge offer next year and we might have to let him go. this year has been fun thanks to Hill just for that I'd keep him
Image

Props to sidthekid871
User avatar
The Rock
CL Twitter Team
 
Posts: 19991
Joined: Sun Jan 13, 2008 11:10 pm
Location: Smackdown Hotel

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby Doc Brown on Tue Nov 19, 2013 1:41 pm

borri wrote:
Doc Brown wrote:What other injuries did he have before coming to the Lakers?


I am curious too. I know he supposedly had a meniscus issue when he arrived....that's supposedly why Potato Head didn't play him for the first 20 or so games upon being traded from HOU to LAL for Fisher.

It's not like he's got a degenerative condition like Bynum.


I found he sprained his MCL with the Rockets on Feb.19 and would miss two weeks because of it. That's right around the time we acquired him.
Rule of Thumb at ClubLakers - Never encourage people to check your post history.
User avatar
Doc Brown

 
Posts: 19446
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:11 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby LakersN4 on Tue Nov 19, 2013 1:58 pm

Doc Brown wrote:What other injuries did he have before coming to the Lakers?

I can't find any info on previous injuries but outside of the 10'/11' season with Houston when he played 72 games, he's played 24, 23, 32, 7, & 29 games.. I don't know if a ton of DNP CD are to blame or he was limited by injuries but either way, that's not enough games for us to be dumping a ton of money into him in our current position.. If we already had a championship core in place, no doubt he's a guy you spend to keep if you can.. But in our situation it'd be a safer bet to spend big on proven commodities.. I'd rather get something for him than let him walk of course.. Hopefully he ups his value enough to make a swap for Faried make sense for Denver so we don't lose our edge on the boards/hustle play, or land us a starting PG.. If we can get players of that stature that fit into our plans better then why turn it down to gamble on a player that hasn't proven enough in my eyes.
LakersN4

 
Posts: 2514
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 2:55 am

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby Doc Brown on Tue Nov 19, 2013 2:07 pm

1.) It's not as easy as either way. If you are making the claim he is injury prone or has an injury history. You better have the facts to back that up, otherwise why make that claim?

2.)Faried is asking for a multi-million dollar extension for 10 million plus a year. Our current position isn't right to give Hill money, but it's fine getting a guy that wants a fat contract?

3.) We trade Hill for a starting PG, now we need a starting C. Which one is easier to find these days?

4.) If we can get a star for Hill, I'm all for it. We can get a starting PG in Lowry, used him as an example, in FA and still keep Hill. I just don't see the point of trading Hill for pieces like that, when we can get it in FA and/or we lose a starter to gain a starter at another position.
Rule of Thumb at ClubLakers - Never encourage people to check your post history.
User avatar
Doc Brown

 
Posts: 19446
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:11 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby Dfishman on Tue Nov 19, 2013 2:31 pm

I really don't think there's any danger of an Earl Clark situation with Hill. For starters, Hill has never been inconsistent. He's always been this good and this efficient (when not injured of course), it's just that he wasn't used as much. If I recall, he had the best rebound per 40 minute average when he joined our team, he just never got anywhere near 40 minutes. As his minutes have increased, so has his production. It's not like Earl Clark who got his chances and came up big sometimes but then came up small the next game or so, or who would go on streaks but then come back to Earth at some point.
User avatar
Dfishman

 
Posts: 473
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 8:43 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby therealdeal on Tue Nov 19, 2013 3:28 pm

Dfishman wrote:I really don't think there's any danger of an Earl Clark situation with Hill. For starters, Hill has never been inconsistent. He's always been this good and this efficient (when not injured of course), it's just that he wasn't used as much. If I recall, he had the best rebound per 40 minute average when he joined our team, he just never got anywhere near 40 minutes. As his minutes have increased, so has his production. It's not like Earl Clark who got his chances and came up big sometimes but then came up small the next game or so, or who would go on streaks but then come back to Earth at some point.

What you're saying supports the theory that he will get offered more money than we're willing to pay him... :man3:

If Hill could be used to get a great piece, I'm absolutely all in on it. But only for a great piece. Next season we're looking at rebuilding around stars. We don't have the luxury of using that money on someone like Jordan, even if we want him back.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 40322
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby thkthebest on Tue Nov 19, 2013 3:38 pm

Jordan Hill stats
#2 in offensive rebound percentage (behind Dejuan Blair).
#15 in defensive rebound percentage.
#2 in total rebound percentage (behind Dwight Howard).
#6 in contested rebounds per game

It's impressive that Jordan Hill gets the # of rebounds that he does since so many of them are contested. Meanwhile, Dwight and Love lead the league in uncontested rebounds per game (which is when nobody is within the vicinity of the rebound).
thkthebest

 
Posts: 3954
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 12:59 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby LakersN4 on Tue Nov 19, 2013 4:21 pm

Doc Brown wrote:1.) It's not as easy as either way. If you are making the claim he is injury prone or has an injury history. You better have the facts to back that up, otherwise why make that claim?

2.)Faried is asking for a multi-million dollar extension for 10 million plus a year. Our current position isn't right to give Hill money, but it's fine getting a guy that wants a fat contract?

3.) We trade Hill for a starting PG, now we need a starting C. Which one is easier to find these days?

4.) If we can get a star for Hill, I'm all for it. We can get a starting PG in Lowry, used him as an example, in FA and still keep Hill. I just don't see the point of trading Hill for pieces like that, when we can get it in FA and/or we lose a starter to gain a starter at another position.

Ok maybe I should have said he hasn't shown that he can be relied upon for an entire season & play big minutes yet.. He's certainly been injury prone during his tenure as a Laker.. He had his role limited every season until this 1.. It's possible that he's just breaking out due to the playing time & he's going to go on to be a top 10 PF in the league.. But would you really bet on him doing that over a guy like Faried?

To your 2nd point, yes Faried is asking for an extension but he won't be a free agent until 2015. So not only do we get a player with more of a track record for being able to contribute over the stretch of a complete season/playoff run, we also get an extra season to evaluate his play & have a better idea of what he's actually worth paying.

Yeah it's harder to get a good starting C, but that hasn't been a problem for us over the years.. but I'm sure if we trade Hill & pieces for a starting PG it won't be the only move we make.. You have Blake playing like a legit starting PG, Farmar already being underplayed, & possibly even Nash attempting to play again.. Unless Nash retires or Blake is included with Hill, there's no doubt we trade 1 of them. Our defense would be atrocious with Pau & Kaman anchoring it but if we can get a star PG I think that's a chance you have to take.. I'm not saying give him up for any starting PG in the league.. But if he can be part of a package for a player like Rondo, Teague, Lawson, or Dragic.. That's something we have to do..
LakersN4

 
Posts: 2514
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 2:55 am

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby borri on Tue Nov 19, 2013 4:52 pm

thkthebest wrote:Jordan Hill stats
#2 in offensive rebound percentage (behind Dejuan Blair).
#15 in defensive rebound percentage.
#2 in total rebound percentage (behind Dwight Howard).
#6 in contested rebounds per game

It's impressive that Jordan Hill gets the # of rebounds that he does since so many of them are contested. Meanwhile, Dwight and Love lead the league in uncontested rebounds per game (which is when nobody is within the vicinity of the rebound).


Nice stats. #15 is defensive rebound %. I think it's this low because Hill is ALWAYS the helper when paint penetration occurs because Pau is just too damn slow to do it. Or when he was off the bench, he was our only big so he was always the helper.

What's Pau's uncontested rebound %? I am curious if my theory hold any water concerning why Hill isn't higher on the defendisve rebound %.
User avatar
borri

 
Posts: 8035
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 5:16 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby thkthebest on Tue Nov 19, 2013 5:03 pm

Pau is 5th in the league in uncontested rebounds per game. It goes Dwight, Love, Nikola, DeAndre, and then Pau. 31.3% of his rebounds are contested, which means almost 70% of his rebounds are uncontested.

If you look at only players who get at least 7 rebounds per game (random number I chose to filter out guards and such), Jordan hill is 2nd in the league in contested rebound percentage at 53.5%. In other words, more than half of his rebounds come from battling/being contested. Enes Kanter is #1. Asik, Hibbert, and Zach are also up there.
thkthebest

 
Posts: 3954
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2007 12:59 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby lukewaltonsdad on Tue Nov 19, 2013 5:23 pm

LakersN4 wrote:
Doc Brown wrote:1.) It's not as easy as either way. If you are making the claim he is injury prone or has an injury history. You better have the facts to back that up, otherwise why make that claim?

2.)Faried is asking for a multi-million dollar extension for 10 million plus a year. Our current position isn't right to give Hill money, but it's fine getting a guy that wants a fat contract?

3.) We trade Hill for a starting PG, now we need a starting C. Which one is easier to find these days?

4.) If we can get a star for Hill, I'm all for it. We can get a starting PG in Lowry, used him as an example, in FA and still keep Hill. I just don't see the point of trading Hill for pieces like that, when we can get it in FA and/or we lose a starter to gain a starter at another position.

Ok maybe I should have said he hasn't shown that he can be relied upon for an entire season & play big minutes yet.. He's certainly been injury prone during his tenure as a Laker.. He had his role limited every season until this 1.. It's possible that he's just breaking out due to the playing time & he's going to go on to be a top 10 PF in the league.. But would you really bet on him doing that over a guy like Faried?

To your 2nd point, yes Faried is asking for an extension but he won't be a free agent until 2015. So not only do we get a player with more of a track record for being able to contribute over the stretch of a complete season/playoff run, we also get an extra season to evaluate his play & have a better idea of what he's actually worth paying.

Yeah it's harder to get a good starting C, but that hasn't been a problem for us over the years.. but I'm sure if we trade Hill & pieces for a starting PG it won't be the only move we make.. You have Blake playing like a legit starting PG, Farmar already being underplayed, & possibly even Nash attempting to play again.. Unless Nash retires or Blake is included with Hill, there's no doubt we trade 1 of them. Our defense would be atrocious with Pau & Kaman anchoring it but if we can get a star PG I think that's a chance you have to take.. I'm not saying give him up for any starting PG in the league.. But if he can be part of a package for a player like Rondo, Teague, Lawson, or Dragic.. That's something we have to do..


I wouldn't include Teague or Dragic for a guy like Hill; Lawson and Rondo, sign me up...nevertheless, let's be realistic, Hill is not going to get us a All-Star Caliber player by himself or packaged with anybody on on our roster, unless we attach our first round draft pick, IMO, and that has a very remote possibility of happening. The only way I see Hill getting us a star back for Hill is being involved with a three-team trade; other than that, it's not happening. WTS, I would still gauge his trade value and see what teams are offering for him...
lukewaltonsdad

 
Posts: 797
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2013 9:14 am

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby Dfishman on Tue Nov 19, 2013 6:04 pm

therealdeal wrote:
Dfishman wrote:I really don't think there's any danger of an Earl Clark situation with Hill. For starters, Hill has never been inconsistent. He's always been this good and this efficient (when not injured of course), it's just that he wasn't used as much. If I recall, he had the best rebound per 40 minute average when he joined our team, he just never got anywhere near 40 minutes. As his minutes have increased, so has his production. It's not like Earl Clark who got his chances and came up big sometimes but then came up small the next game or so, or who would go on streaks but then come back to Earth at some point.

What you're saying supports the theory that he will get offered more money than we're willing to pay him... :man3:

If Hill could be used to get a great piece, I'm absolutely all in on it. But only for a great piece. Next season we're looking at rebuilding around stars. We don't have the luxury of using that money on someone like Jordan, even if we want him back.


I think you're spot on. I meant that we (as in, the people of the universe) can rest assured his recent success isn't a fluke, like it was with Earl Clark. I also realize this means he's gonna be very expensive come free agency.
User avatar
Dfishman

 
Posts: 473
Joined: Thu Dec 21, 2006 8:43 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby therealdeal on Tue Nov 19, 2013 6:11 pm

Dfishman wrote:
therealdeal wrote:
Dfishman wrote:I really don't think there's any danger of an Earl Clark situation with Hill. For starters, Hill has never been inconsistent. He's always been this good and this efficient (when not injured of course), it's just that he wasn't used as much. If I recall, he had the best rebound per 40 minute average when he joined our team, he just never got anywhere near 40 minutes. As his minutes have increased, so has his production. It's not like Earl Clark who got his chances and came up big sometimes but then came up small the next game or so, or who would go on streaks but then come back to Earth at some point.

What you're saying supports the theory that he will get offered more money than we're willing to pay him... :man3:

If Hill could be used to get a great piece, I'm absolutely all in on it. But only for a great piece. Next season we're looking at rebuilding around stars. We don't have the luxury of using that money on someone like Jordan, even if we want him back.


I think you're spot on. I meant that we (as in, the people of the universe) can rest assured his recent success isn't a fluke, like it was with Earl Clark. I also realize this means he's gonna be very expensive come free agency.

Oh I see. Yeah I remember speculating the kind of production he can have when given minutes. It always comes back to two things: 1. He's going to get a double-double and 2. He has to stay healthy.
Stu : "Yeah, that's an old fashioned whoopin'."
therealdeal
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 40322
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2008 3:03 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby borri on Tue Nov 19, 2013 6:32 pm

thkthebest wrote:Pau is 5th in the league in uncontested rebounds per game. It goes Dwight, Love, Nikola, DeAndre, and then Pau. 31.3% of his rebounds are contested, which means almost 70% of his rebounds are uncontested.

If you look at only players who get at least 7 rebounds per game (random number I chose to filter out guards and such), Jordan hill is 2nd in the league in contested rebound percentage at 53.5%. In other words, more than half of his rebounds come from battling/being contested. Enes Kanter is #1. Asik, Hibbert, and Zach are also up there.


LOL so Antoni was right on why Pau wants to play with Hill....because Hill does in fact do ALL the dirty work as 70% of Pau boards are of the uncontested nature.
User avatar
borri

 
Posts: 8035
Joined: Sat Feb 19, 2005 5:16 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby karacha on Tue Nov 19, 2013 6:51 pm

Of course he was right.
"It's not realistic to get younger and better when you only have the veteran's minimum to offer free agents." :mhihi:

-Troll Kupchak
User avatar
karacha
CL Global Moderator
 
Posts: 37447
Joined: Tue Nov 01, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby davriver290 on Tue Nov 19, 2013 9:33 pm

Man, Hill is playing awesome. everytime he's on the floor, good things always happen. Yet, this thread has turned into trading him and or already thinking about his contract? Jeez, just enjoy while he's here lol.
Sessions, Kobe, Metta, Gasol, Bynum
User avatar
davriver290

 
Posts: 5711
Joined: Sat Jun 17, 2006 3:14 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby lakerfan2 on Wed Nov 20, 2013 10:53 am

^ Because Hill is going to get paid plain and simple if he keeps up this play.

A PF/C combo with size who plays hard and well on both ends of the floor is a rare breed nowadays.
#OURHOUSE
User avatar
lakerfan2

 
Posts: 9914
Joined: Wed Feb 21, 2007 5:23 pm

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby Doc Brown on Wed Nov 20, 2013 2:10 pm

lakerfan2 wrote:^ Because Hill is going to get paid plain and simple if he keeps up this play.

A PF/C combo with size who plays hard and well on both ends of the floor is a rare breed nowadays.


Yet everyone is resigned to the fact that we have to trade him or he's going to walk for a big pay day.

If he's such a rare breed, we should keep him right?

We have to save cap room for all the stars that are for sure going to be coming here in the future.
Rule of Thumb at ClubLakers - Never encourage people to check your post history.
User avatar
Doc Brown

 
Posts: 19446
Joined: Thu Jun 24, 2010 10:11 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby SK8 on Wed Nov 20, 2013 3:07 pm

I would be really happy if we can keep him, i think he is thankful to Lakers, because i remember it was that game vs Thunders, when Blake and he played whole 4th quarter and overtime and he dominated, before that to be honest, nobody didn't even know what beast this dude really is, and now he is showing us again, but this time he is starter and there is no diva Dwight, so he have his place if he can keep this level, around 18ppg 11rpg, that would be awesome, BUT now real question is, are we ready to put some serious $$$ on table...
Example is Larry Sanders from Bucks, dude got new contract on 4 years 44$ millions :man4:
and i think Jordan is already better than Sanders, he is maybe a little bit better on D, but Hill is under rated on offence and he is definitely game changer.
The second place means you're the first loser
ex Uncle Drew
User avatar
SK8

 
Posts: 1507
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 11:26 am

Re: Jordan Hill Discussion: Doing work

Postby LakersN4 on Wed Nov 20, 2013 3:25 pm

If you're looking at paying Larry Sanders money to Hill, having to bring Kobe back which won't be as cheap as any of us hope it will, + trying to save enough to bring some of our 1 year contracts back like Wes, Farmar, X, Young if he opts out.. There's no way we have enough left to bring in a star player next summer.. We might have enough to make an offer to someone like Deng in the 8-10M range.. & all that is assuming we don't even attempt to bring Pau back or he accepts the MLE after we cap out signing everyone else.. We could still sign Melo or Lebron to a max deal if we're willing to let all of our role players walk or can get a few of them to accept splitting the MLE.. That doesn't sound like the way our FO operates though.. We swing for the fences & let role players walk when other teams want to overpay for them.. If we already had a championship core in place I think Hill is a gamble worth going over the cap to retain, but there's just no way the FO will commit that type of money to Hill vs. throwing it at big names.. There's no way they pass on the chance to add a true superstar if it's there.
LakersN4

 
Posts: 2514
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2007 2:55 am

PreviousNext

Return to Lakers Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 12 guests

cron
Advertise Here | Privacy Policy | ©2008 Sculu Sports. Come Strong.